(1.) THIS is an appeal against acquittal filed by the State government against the order of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pune on 23/06/1988 in Criminal Case No. 207 of 1978. The respondents and one other accused was prosecuted for the contravention of the provisions of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 before the Judicial magistrate, First Class, Pune.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution was that the Mustard oil which was seized from the shop of the respondent No. 1 was found to be adulterated. In the present case an affidavit has been filed by the son of respondent no. 4, Narayandas Ratanlal Oza. He has stated that the respondent No. 4 has suffered an attack of paralysis and was under treatment of one Dr. Divate at Pune. He has further stated that the accused No. 2, Khivraj girdharilal Oza has expired in the year 1981 and the accused No. 3 Ratanlal mayaram Oza has also expired in 1994. It is further stated that the name of the accused No. 3 is wrongly shown in the paper book as Ratanlal narayan Oza. In fact, it is stated that, the correct name is Ratanlal Mayaram oza. He has further submitted that the accused No. 2 is unable to move out of the house as he is bed ridden.
(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and respondent. It is not disputed that the original accused No. 2 and 3 are dead. The only surviving accused is bedridden and aged more than 70 years. The trial Court has taken into consideration the evidence of the prosecution. The trial Court has not relied upon the chemical analyser's report as the procedure for sealing the samples has not been proved. Further the trial Court has filed that the report of the Public Analyst shows fhat the samples disclosed that they were within the limits of prescribed standard of Mustard oil as mentioned in appendix B-A 17. 06 and there was slight variation under the saponification value which is possible in the light of circumstances regarding use of the aluminium pot and the cloth for cleaning the Aluminium pot.